Do you believe in Hell and why?/why not?

[Timothew]

You won't find very many English translations that agree with you. Most totally disagree with you.

And they ALL disagree with you. The wages of sin is death, not eternal torture in hell.

 

[Timothew]

I merely said the OP was vague. I didn't say Hell fire isn't eternal.

Perhaps I wrongly assumed 'Hell' meant eternity in the fire.

It looks that way to me.

 

[dollarsbill]

And they ALL disagree with you. The wages of sin is death, not eternal torture in hell.

You can disregard the NT teachings of punishment in fire but they are still there.

Matthew 25:41-46
41 "Then He will also say to those on His left, 'Depart from Me, accursed ones, into the eternal fire which has been prepared for the devil and his angels;
46 "These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."

 

[Mikecpking]

I merely said the OP was vague. I didn't say Hell fire isn't eternal.

In an earlier post, you were using the lake of fire as a definition for 'hell'. Which it cannot be.

 

[dollarsbill]

In an earlier post, you were using the lake of fire as a definition for 'hell'. Which it cannot be.

Isn't the main point here eternal punishment in the eternal, unquenchable, everlasting fire that is mentioned many times in the NT?

 

[Mikecpking]

Isn't the main point here eternal punishment in the eternal, unquenchable, everlasting fire that is mentioned many times in the NT?

I think the definitions used needs a big revamp, because 'hades', 'gehenna', 'lake of fire' needs careful handling with an aspect on how the writers at the time understood it. 'Death' does not mean 'eternal life in hell being tortured', but the consequences of everlasting punishment would mean exactly that; the person would ultimately die. We read only the beast, false prophet and Satan would be tormented forever, and also the people who receive the mark or worshipped the beast, but not anyone else who was outside that category. We do read that that those who were not found in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire and that was the 2nd death..is a case for these people being annihilated.

 

[Sadalmelik]

You won't find very many English translations that agree with you. Most totally disagree with you.

agree, and by you specifically bringing up english translations, your only proving my point, your just blinded to the fact that your doing so.....the greek/hebrew languages are and were completely different...therefore translators have the task of trying to "morph" one language into another....the original texts were very specific and had only one meaning for each word....that is not the case with american english... some words have many different meanings.....

just in case you ever heard some people say, english is one of, if not the hardest language to learn, there is a reason for that.

if you wish to continue accepting terms used in scripture which you dont understand nor do you know what their original and true meaning was and is, then i cannot help you with that.


i do not translate bibles for a living....it takes time, research, patience, and an open mind to understand these things....the information on this subject is all over the internet....if one is willing to put the time in, they can learn, if not, then there is no point in arguing about it....

 

[Timothew]

You can disregard the NT teachings of punishment in fire but they are still there.

Matthew 25:41-46
41 "Then He will also say to those on His left, 'Depart from Me, accursed ones, into the eternal fire which has been prepared for the devil and his angels;
46 "These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."

I don't disregard it. I know what happens to something if it is put into fire. The fire destroys it.

The eternal punishment is the second death, from which there is no resurrection. Death is an eternal punishment. I don't disregard the teachings of the NT, I just don't misunderstand them like you do.

 

[Sadalmelik]

here ill help you get started....the terms your referring to are "aion" and "aionios", if you google them for definitions, in relation to the verses your having trouble with, perhaps you can learn what there true meaning is.....and not the english meaning that has been improperly translated.....to mean something it is not....
'

 

[Timothew]

I am a believer in eternal punishment or an eternity of torment for unbelievers.

I found this argument online and I have to admit it is by far better a better explanation than anything I have read on here....

[FONT=Times New Roman, times, serif]Biblically Dispelling the Myth of Eternal Torture[/FONT]​

I haven't changed my views but this article did shed some light on why some of ya'll are so venomously behind this view and also kind of shows me the angle at which "Final Death" believers (not sure what the correct term is) are coming from.

I just think it would be a good article for both sides to read.

This is a great article, thanks.
I don't know how anyone could read this and remain unconvinced of the truth of scripture. I have been aware of the scripture passages he uses for a long time now, and more and more scripture passages confirm the truth daily, but he sets out the case far better than I can.

Speaking of terms for the 2 sides in this debate, What do supporters of eternal torment prefer to be called? On my side, I prefer "Conditionalist" from the term "Conditional Immortality", since immortality is only bestowed on a persons after a certain "Condition" is met. The condition is believing in and trusting in Jesus Christ for eternal life. You could also just call me "biblically accurate."

 

[Sadalmelik]

it is a good and well thought out article, i agree, that i cant see how anyone can read this and not even have pause, and further question the orthodox doctrine....let alone completely reject the traditional view....but....to each his/her own...all we "conditionalists" (thanx tim, i like that word), have been saying is not to accept our word for it, and change course overnight....we are not here to convince anyone of anything.....we are only trying to tell you that there is another, more truthful and enlightening way of interpreting the scripture concerning hell, based soundly on scripture, and that you have the ability to do the research on your own....you shouldnt want someone else to do that for you,,,,thats the reason the doctrine of eternal hellfire was accepted so easily and continuously, and still is to this day, imo, cause everyones just taking someone elses view/interpretation of hell..

i respect the right for jpcedotal to hold his view after reading this....AT LEAST HE TOOK the time to research it and formulate an opinion based on it, which many, actually most are not willing to do...thus is where my confusion comes in...

but if someone says to me i have researched and read all the proof that eternal hell is not real, and i disagree with it, and still believe in a neverending fire chamber, what am i supposed to do.....nothing....how anyone can come to that conclusion is beyond me.....but then again, there are many things in this life i cant figure out....peace

 

[drjean]

I have researched it through Scripture and regardless of what name you attach to it, I wholeheartedly believe there is indeed a place of torment, originally created for the devil and his followers, but where those who reject Christ Jesus will also end up.

 

[Sadalmelik]

I have researched it through Scripture and regardless of what name you attach to it, I wholeheartedly believe there is indeed a place of torment, originally created for the devil and his followers, but where those who reject Christ Jesus will also end up.

thankyou dr jean.....happy your content with your beliefs.

 

[Timothew]

I have researched it through Scripture and regardless of what name you attach to it, I wholeheartedly believe there is indeed a place of torment, originally created for the devil and his followers, but where those who reject Christ Jesus will also end up.

You missed a few (a lot of) verses that say otherwise.

 

[drjean]

You missed a few (a lot of) verses that say otherwise.

I realize one can find verses that might lean to that effect, however in comparing Scripture with Scripture, it never contradicts itself. Therefore the verses that suggest otherwise are either a continuum of a thought or referring to another area of thought, lack of a complete example, or something along those veins. IMO

 

[Timothew]

I realize one can find verses that might lean to that effect, however in comparing Scripture with Scripture, it never contradicts itself. Therefore the verses that suggest otherwise are either a continuum of a thought or referring to another area of thought, lack of a complete example, or something along those veins. IMO

I'm sorry. I was snippy.

 

[Kepha]

You know, you are correct. And it shouldn't bother me at all to be called a heretic from YOUR self proclaimed pope. But actually it does bother me to see you acting this way.

I wasn't the one starting the accusations. I believe you were the first to say we made it up along the way. The Catholic Church is my Church and if you think that, then you believe it's erroneous heresy that I preach. So why is my throwing it back at you now suddenly offensive?

But on the bright side, we don't need to just roll the dice, as you wish to do. We have the letters from the apostles and we can examine them to determine what is apostolic and what is heretical.

Not true. Take a look around and many folks you see arguing the past 5 years, will be arguing the same things another 5 years from now. Your examining the Scriptures and whatever chapter and verse you're throwing at each other will only take you so far when self is the only deciding arbitrator.

 

[Timothew]

I wasn't the one starting the accusations. I believe you were the first to say we made it up along the way. The Catholic Church is my Church and if you think that, then you believe it's erroneous heresy that I preach. So why is my throwing it back at you now suddenly offensive?

Your very first post to me was an attack, an accusation of heresy. Here it is:

The fact is, one side is being mislead and one isn't yet both have the Holy Spirit guiding you and both believe you have the right to teach the faithful your doctrines even if derived from Heresy. Now what?

So you were the one starting the accusations.

Not true. Take a look around and many folks you see arguing the past 5 years, will be arguing the same things another 5 years from now. Your examining the Scriptures and whatever chapter and verse you're throwing at each other will only take you so far when self is the only deciding arbitrator.

So you say we cannot learn what the scriptures say if even one person disagrees? It is certainly possible for 2 people to disagree and have one of the people be correct.

I'm more concerned with your judgmental attitude than I am worried about your accusations of me being a heretic. Your opinion doesn't matter, your poor attitude does matter.

 

[Hentenza]

Thread closed.

Annihilation needs to be discussed in the unorthodox theology forum.